Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Lunar landing”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 109 records · Page 6
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2011

Hazard Detection Software for Lunar Landing

The Autonomous Landing and Hazard Avoidance Technology (ALHAT) Project is developing a system for safe and precise manned lunar landing that involves novel sensors, but also specific algorithms. ALHAT has selected imaging LIDAR (light detection and ranging) as the sensing modality for onboard hazard detection because imaging LIDARs can rapidly generate direct measurements of the lunar surface elevation from high altitude. Then, starting with the LIDAR-based Hazard Detection and Avoidance (HDA) algorithm developed for Mars Landing, JPL has developed a mature set of HDA software for the manned lunar landing problem. Landing hazards exist everywhere on the Moon, and many of the more desirable landing sites are near the most hazardous terrain, so HDA is needed to autonomously and safely land payloads over much of the lunar surface. The HDA requirements used in the ALHAT project are to detect hazards that are 0.3 m tall or higher and slopes that are 5 or greater. Steep slopes, rocks, cliffs, and gullies are all hazards for landing and, by computing the local slope and roughness in an elevation map, all of these hazards can be detected. The algorithm in this innovation is used to measure slope and roughness hazards. In addition to detecting these hazards, the HDA capability also is able to find a safe landing site free of these hazards for a lunar lander with diameter .15 m over most of the lunar surface. This software includes an implementation of the HDA algorithm, software for generating simulated lunar terrain maps for testing, hazard detection performance analysis tools, and associated documentation. The HDA software has been deployed to Langley Research Center and integrated into the POST II Monte Carlo simulation environment. The high-fidelity Monte Carlo simulations determine the required ground spacing between LIDAR samples (ground sample distances) and the noise on the LIDAR range measurement. This simulation has also been used to determine the effect of viewing on hazard detection performance. The software has also been deployed to Johnson Space Center and integrated into the ALHAT real-time Hardware-in-the-Loop testbed.

Huertas, Andres↗
NASA NTRS1988

Lunar landing and launch facilities and operations

A preliminary design of a lunar landing and launch facility for a Phase 3 lunar base is formulated. A single multipurpose vehicle for the lunar module is assumed. Three traffic levels are envisioned: 6, 12, and 24 landings/launches per year. The facility is broken down into nine major design items. A conceptual description of each of these items is included. Preliminary sizes, capacities, and/or other relevant design data for some of these items are obtained. A quonset hut tent-like structure constructed of aluminum rods and aluminized mylar panels is proposed. This structure is used to provide a constant thermal environment for the lunar modules. A structural design and thermal analysis is presented. Two independent designs for a bridge crane to unload/load heavy cargo from the lunar module are included. Preliminary investigations into cryogenic propellant storage and handling, landing/launch guidance and control, and lunar module maintenance requirements are performed. Also, an initial study into advanced concepts for application to Phase 4 or 5 lunar bases has been completed in a report on capturing, condensing, and recycling the exhaust plume from a lunar launch.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1988

Lunar landing and launch facilities and operations

A preliminary definition of a lunar landing and launch facility (LLLF or Complex 391) has been formulated. A Phase 3 lunar base is considered. Without specifying specific lunar base scenarios, three traffic levels are envisioned: 6, 12, and 24 landings/launches per year. A single, multipurpose vehicle for the lunar module is assumed. The design and specification of the vehicle and of the lunar base are outside the scope of this study. However, these two items will impact those items considered within the scope of this study because of interactions at the system boundaries. The scope of this study is graphically portrayed with the systems diagram. Based upon this diagram, nine major design items or areas are considered. These items are: (1) landing/launch site considerations; (2) structure, shelter, safety, and environmental needs; (3) landing/launch guidance, communications, and computing needs; (4) lunar module surface transport system; (5) heavy cargo unloading/loading systems; (6) personnel unloading/loading systems; (7) propellant unloading/loading systems; (8) vehicle storage; and (9) maintenance, repair, test and check-out requirements. Initially, a general, conceptual description of each of these items is given. Then, preliminary sizes, capacities, and other relevant design data for some of these items are identified. The Earth-Moon transportation infrastructure and the baseline lunar module design are summarized.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2022

Lunar Landing and Operations Policy Analysis

Just within the next four years, we expect to see at least 22 lunar surface missions. Half of these missions will occur in the Moon’s south polar region. Due to this upcoming proliferation of actors and activities at or near the lunar south pole, and due to the potential close proximity of operations, NASA and other operators will face challenges never faced before. NASA’s Deputy Administrator and Associate Administrator of the Science Mission Directorate (SMD) tasked the Office of Technology, Policy, and Strategy (OTPS) with answering two questions related to the Artemis campaign: (1) what technical and policy considerations should NASA take into account in the selection of lunar landing and operations sites, and (2) what technical and policy considerations should NASA take into account when implementing tools such as safety zones in order to protect these operations and U.S. interests? In addition to the challenges inherent in lunar operations, NASA subject-matter experts (SMEs) are concerned about certain challenges to NASA operations that may require policy solutions. The goal of this report is to provide options and recommendations to NASA leadership and program planners so that they can consider policy measures to respond to those challenges. This report also describes options for transparency, coordination, and implementation to increase the effectiveness of these measures.

lunar policy↗
NASA NTRS2010

Part-Task Simulation of Synthetic and Enhanced Vision Concepts for Lunar Landing

During Apollo, the constraints placed by the design of the Lunar Module (LM) window for crew visibility and landing trajectory were a major problem. Lunar landing trajectories were tailored to provide crew visibility using nearly 70 degrees look-down angle from the canted LM windows. Apollo landings were scheduled only at specific times and locations to provide optimal sunlight on the landing site. The complications of trajectory design and crew visibility are still a problem today. Practical vehicle designs for lunar lander missions using optimal or near-optimal fuel trajectories render the natural vision of the crew from windows inadequate for the approach and landing task. Further, the sun angles for the desirable landing areas in the lunar polar regions create visually powerful, season-long shadow effects. Fortunately, Synthetic and Enhanced Vision (S/EV) technologies, conceived and developed in the aviation domain, may provide solutions to this visibility problem and enable additional benefits for safer, more efficient lunar operations. Piloted simulation evaluations have been conducted to assess the handling qualities of the various lunar landing concepts, including the influence of cockpit displays and the informational data and formats. Evaluation pilots flew various landing scenarios with S/EV displays. For some of the evaluation trials, an eye glasses-mounted, monochrome monocular display, coupled with head tracking, was worn. The head-worn display scene consisted of S/EV fusion concepts. The results of this experiment showed that a head-worn system did not increase the pilot s workload when compared to using just the head-down displays. As expected, the head-worn system did not provide an increase in performance measures. Some pilots commented that the head-worn system provided greater situational awareness compared to just head-down displays.

Arthur, Jarvis J., III↗
NASA NTRS1973

Apollo experience report: Evolution of the rendezvous-maneuver plan for the lunar-landing missions

The evolution of the nominal rendezvous-maneuver plan for the lunar landing missions is presented along with a summary of the significant development for the lunar module abort and rescue plan. A general discussion of the rendezvous dispersion analysis that was conducted in support of both the nominal and contingency rendezvous planning is included. Emphasis is placed on the technical developments from the early 1960's through the Apollo 15 mission (July to August 1971), but pertinent organizational factors also are discussed briefly. Recommendations for rendezvous planning for future programs relative to Apollo experience also are included.

Alexander, J. D.↗